County seeks funds for thinning

Grant for $3.5 million would target private lands

Forestry officials Mike Caggiano, left, and Frank Silva view Ruidoso area locations that could get an infusion of $3.5 million in federal funding to thin larger properties to reduce the wildfire threat.

Some sizable acreage of private lands in Lincoln County could see fire mitigating thinning projects. Lincoln County Planning Director Curt Temple told the Lincoln County Working Group on Monday that he has been pretty much assured a Federal Emergency Management Agency grant will be awarded to the county.

"We're going to be filling out the final application for the $3.5 million of the HMGP (Hazard Mitigation Grant Program) money," Temple said. "That will be turned in by May 23rd."

Temple said if FEMA fails to award the $3.5 million, the money will go back to the U.S. Treasury.

"There are a couple of other municipalities that are applying for this grant. We're the only one that has an approved FEMA mitigation plan. She (FEMA official) said we went straight to the top of the list and if they don't have their approved FEMA mitigation plan, they're ineligible for the money."

Temple said the mitigation plan was approved by FEMA last year. It puts the threat of wildfire as a top concern for Lincoln County, followed by flooding.

The FEMA grant would cover 75 percent of the cost of thinning projects. Lincoln County would be responsible for the remaining 25 percent. That could include administrative and other in-kind assistance.

"And what will be the property owner's responsibility?" asked Michele Caskey, Lincoln County's information officer. "I mean will they have a financial component of this that's theirs?"

Temple replied no.

Advertisement

"This will all be the county as a health and safety issue for wildfire mitigation."

Time frame

Asked if the envisioned $3.5 million can be spent over a couple of years, Temple said he believed it would have to be used up in one year. Mike Caggiano, the rural community forester with the South Central Mountain Resource, Conservation and Development District, said he doubted one year would be enough time to spend all $3.5 million.

"We don't have the contractor capability. And it takes a lot of work to set these projects up," said Caggiano, who works with a different cost share program to help private property owners make their land better fire defensible. "I'd be very curious if we can get an extension on it. If we can't and the county still wants to spend the whole thing, we're going to have to get more contractors, more forestry inspectors."

Caggiano said it would be hard to spend much more than $1 million in a year. Often with grants, money not spent within an established timeframe must be returned.

Caggiano and New Mexico State Forestry's timber management officer in the area Frank Silva said there have been talks with some larger property owners about the potential grant.

"If we do that legwork even before we have the money, making initial contact with the landowners and say, 'This is what we're doing, let's sign you up.' When the money's there we can be on the ground next week."

Where is the need?

"Right now we need to identify which areas we're going to look at spending this money for. We need to make sure it's around populated areas," Temple said.

"Are we identifying specific parcels that want we want to treat?" Caggiano asked. "Or is it good enough for us to identify general areas as our priority of concern?"

Temple said he reviewed the county's mitigation plan and precise locations were not spelled out. While the grant can be used for a number of hazards, Temple said the number one concern in the county's mitigation plan is wildfire.

"So, I think any place we can get, as long as we can get a benefit cost analysis, we can treat," Temple said.

A home must be within two miles of a thinning treatment. And the grant cannot be used to thin any federal lands.

"And that's why we're looking at more if it goes up to the boundary with the national forest. We need to create more of a fire break from the national forest into the populated area through the private land. And that's going to be the big issue that I see because we can't use it on forest service land."

Caggiano said locations to look at might be subdivisions, especially in the Alto area.

"It might just be smart to do some subdivisions, trying to get those treatments on the southwest sides of those individual subdivisions."

Winds that drive wildland fires around the Sacramento Mountains often blow out of the southwest.

More specific

"One of the major areas that we're looking at is kind of around the Blood Ranch area - trying to get some type of fire break going in that area," Temple said. "Anything we can get to stop from the west I think would be the key goal."

Silva said there are a couple of large land owners in the Blood Ranch area.

"And they did not want us touching that," Silva said.

Caggiano said those land owner might be more receptive to the county.

"And it may not be thinning their whole (property)," Temple said. "It may just be doing a fire break along their boundary. Maybe before, if the state has talked to them, maybe they thought they were going to come in and wipe out their whole population of trees. We can concentrate I think more on between the national forest and the private land and fire breaks in that area, that would be a good start for this money."

Think bigger

"I assume we would want to focus our treatments on five acres and larger because it becomes a lot of work that you have to interface with every landowner for every half-acre property. And you have to worry about objections and concerns and objectives of individual landowners. It becomes a lot easier if you just, a bigger bang for your buck, once you're over five to ten acres."

Caggiano said fuels treatment costs in the mountains around Ruidoso average some $1,500 per acre. In the lower elevations, like at Nogal and Capitan, he put the cost at about $1,000 an acre.

"Mike, that dollar amount you're talking about, will that also include disposal?" questioned Debra Ingle, the operational supervisor for Greentree Solid Waste Authority.

Caggiano and Temple said assuring the trees, branches and other slash are properly disposed of must be a part of

the process.

"That needs to be a part of the whole package before you can kind of figure a per acre cost," Silva added.

Caggiano recommended disposal be a part of any bidding process by thinning contractors.

"I think we're going to require it in our RFP (Request for Proposals) that it's taken care of," Temple said of getting rid of forest slash.

"And that's either going to be through removing it to another location, chipping it on site, spreading, thinning, depending on how thick the area is," Temple said.

Lincoln County Commissioner Kathryn Minter said given the right time of year and the proper conditions, the forest waste could be burned on site. But several cautioned that depending on the size of the property, there would be air quality regulations that impact burning trees and limbs.

"I think if you require the disposal from the contractor, I think that's sufficient," Caggiano said. "How they dispose of that is up to them as long as it's a legal."